nutbean

I still prefer 5c in the first year ( HT - I take very little convincing on what you are saying)

If you play for my team I'll give you 10c over 5 years instead of 2c and front load the contract so you get 5c in the first year. Match that people !!!!

ummm - we lost by 11 points so unless the Watts attempt at goal instead of a point was under super goal rules and then miraculously swung back after going through the goals, bounced off the point post three time to give us the extra three points for a total of 12 points we needed to win the game ( as we lost by 11 points ) I think I will dispute that Watts' miss at goal cost us the game. Feel free to correct my math.

I sent him an email telling Mr Slattery that he or his editors had failed in their job as the job is to look at all material for publication and challenge facts where there are facts to ensure they are verifiable and challenge opinions where there are opinions to ensure the opinions are not illogical/without reason. I challenged him to let me write an article on why the AFL had failed in their thinking in not capping the availability of uncontracted players by a certain length of service/age. You can argue 5 years or 7 years or even 4 years service to a club enables uncontracted footballers be targeted (I personally believe 24 is minimum) but you cannot argue that it is defeating the purpose of the draft to have a system where poor onfield performance is recognised by access to the better players ( read better draft picks) only to see these players possibly being poached after 2 seasons ( read Scully/Martin/NicNat. I also noted that their is enough opinion in main stream media and by being under the AFL banner and selectively choosing what to give an opinion on( albeit with the disclaimer that "my opinion is not my opinion") the AFL is lending itself to complaints of singling out certain clubs for either praise or damnation.

Couldnt agree more - however the major difference is that these papers are (supposedly) independent and do not operate under the AFL Banner. If there is to be opinion pieces under the AFL Banner then they have to have a duty of care to be "fair and reasonable" to all their clubs that they represent. Whilst I am not certain I would like to challenge the editor to list me all of the other "opinion" pieces put on AFL.com ( as opposed to puff and fluff pieces). Direct me to the opinion pieces about Nixon, direct me to the opinion pieces about Fevola, direct me to any opinion pieces about hot controversial topics. And when I am directed to these pieces let me see their reasonable logic used. On hot topics they may list facts but to my knowledge never venture opinion/editorial I would suggest that what we have seen here is the first. It is not shabby factual article, it is a shabby opinion/editorial not based faulty illogical premises.

And to repeat what I said earlier - for an opinion to have credibility it may not necessarily be backed by fact but needs to be backed by logic and reason and the article was devoid of both. A fair reasonable person should be able to look at a differing opinion and say " I don't necessarily agree but I can understand the basis for your opinion". ( to this end I respect that opinion that TS may sign with GWS for the lure of bigger money but in absense of facts confirming that he has already done so (statements exist to the contrary) and in defiance of logic and reason as to why he would do so now, I cant respect the opinion that he has signed already ) It is the editors role to ensure articles published have facts that are verifiable or failing that have opinions that can be backed by reason and logic" FAIL

Still misses the point - Jeff White was not about what picks we gave or how much he was paid. Fact one - he wanted to come home. Everything else is after the fact. There is an interesting read on opinion journalism and as some posters have said that maybe opinion journalism has place on the AFL site. http://rhetorica.net/archives/7666.html To me these quotes are pivotal and why the article submitted by Phelan was garbage and why the editors of AFL.com have failed by allowing garbage to be printed. "Like reporters, opinion journalists should operate as custodians of fact with a discipline of verification. " - Phelan FAIL "opinion should be about changing hearts and minds with knowledge and wisdom" Phelan FAIL I especially liked these quotes

I can't find the response on the facebook page as I would like to make comment. The original article and the response prompts the questions - If indeed there are these sorts of opinion pieces on the AFL website ( please point me to them) then I would ask if there is an editorial staff in place that could allow this piece to be printed - or at least competent editorial staff. A publication may publish opinion pieces (I for one dont think that AFL.com needs to run opinion pieces - there are enough media outlets already doing so) but the Editor needs to ensure that the opinion ( in fact any article) can at least stand up to logical and rigorous scrutiny. I respect anyones right to a differing opinion - but if an opinion cannot be backed with some logic or reason then stand by for disrespect. The article is so flawed in so many ways the editor should have told his journalist - go back and have another go. As an example - if anyone wants to argue that it is difficult to set an age or years of service cut off for poaching uncontracted players then there is merit in this opinion. I respect the opinion of old55 in regards to Marc Murphy - should Carlton feel any less aggrieved at the attempt to lure Murphy as we should with Scully ? The difficulty is setting the line. But to suggest that there is no difference between signing a 2nd year player ( to be poached for the 3rd year) and a 9 year player ( poached to play in his 10th season) that has played in 2 premierships, 3 grand finals and won a brownlow is an opinion that should be subject to ridicule. Gary Ablett has stated ( whether you want to believe it or not) that a large part of his reason is that he has achieved so much at Geelong and this is a chance to help a start up club. Can a 2nd year footballer make this statement ? The same could be expressed for Jeff White comparisons - forget money, forget draft picks, forget compensation - it is stated and documented that he wanted to come home. ( refer articles to him "Crying to his mother on the phone"). To repeat - feel free to give opinions - but be prepared for backlash if those opinions have no substance or logic behind them. For an AFL site to publish opinion pieces in my opinion is unnecessary ( and this can be debated) but to allow opinion pieces to be published under the AFL Banner that are devoid of logic is just plain wrong.

As a minor the law can make a person accept help whether she wants it or not. ( not sure legally though if a minor is under 16 or under 18 ) I just wish the help she had received wasn't from humanitarians like Ricky Nixon and Sam Gilbert ( and apparently others )

Can't keep a good thread down

GWS = Giants welcome Scully ( my bad)

Gotta love such bold pronouncements ! I don't lower my expectations but you have to put things into prespective. First and foremost - the big disclaimer in my expectation is injuries. Given a fair run with injuries I can see us pushing for the eight. Its all about keeping your best players on the paddock ( and the umpires not wearing the same coloured jumpers as us.) I will judge Bailey on the amount of games we produce form of the ilk of the Brisbane game last year and the two Collingwood games ( and that form brought us a win, a loss and a draw !)

Thinking Lindsay, Paris and Brittany - two major differences. Firstly these three had one extra element in the mix and from what I can gather they are missing one element that this girl has. The Hollywood three have unlimited money with no boundaries which is a lethal ingredient into a life of "excess". And the missing ingredient is the Hollywood three seemed to self destruct without too much help from others. This girl has had a helping hand from some footballers and a manager ?

my brain hurts

I'm not sure what Brisbane has done wrong. I certainly think that Fevola has problems - the arguments will continue endlessly as to whether he is unable to control his behaviour due to depressionor other mental illness or we want to go with "he should just take responsibility for his own actions" argument. Either way, the club has a responsibility to not only Fevola but the other players on the list and having this sort of behavioural problems within a GROUP is unacceptable. The Lions have not said you are fired and on your own sport - they have said they will continue to support his recovery and rehabilitation but he cant play for the team anymore. He may well recover and be productive and not cause disruption but they have a whole group of other players to think of. For this reason I did not like the idea of us recruiting Cousins or a Carey or other troubled souls. Do they deserve a second chance ? Do they deserve help getting back on their feet ? Sure. Do I want their second chance to be a risk to another 40 odd footballers. Nope. It is not a god given right to play AFL and when you have damaged the club as he has for whatever reason, certainly you may have a responsibility to help him get back on his feet but not to the possible detriment of 40 other players on the list.

I'm not a man of violence - but spot on ! (cowards run in my family)

cheers to you ! Taking out the innocents like Nick Reiwoldt is all part of the reason why I have constantly stated "she know not what she doth". She is lacking in reason, she is lacking in sensitivity, she is not discerning and she lacks discretion, she will take out the innocent and the guilty alike without any thought. She is a child and not in control despite what we way may think. She is making decisions that she thinks are in her best interest but with the benefit of experience and some hindsight down the track, she will (may ?) realise that she is not only hurting others but herself.

well said and my point exactly (and why I fear the outcome)

I guess what I am really saying ( and generalising about) is whilst I don't think that wisdom is confined to a certain age group, the younger crop seem to be more black and white and dare I say harsh ? unforgiving ? in their outlook and attitudes. I can almost pick the older posters on this forum by their ability to see the shades of grey in most arguments. Usually more circumspect and not quite as quick on the trigger. So endth my generalisations - bring it on !

Please delete the word "probably"

Being a long time follower but a recent poster ( I reckon that 95% of my posts are on the Scully issue - sad I know) - I think it should be mandatory to put your age into your profile. I am going to run with a big generalisation here but you can almost pick the age by the response.

Because all kids this age know what they are doing ? This is where we differ. She is out of her league, out of her depth and out of control.

nah - hairy backed slapper who deserves what she gets - after all - at 15/16 you have worldly experience and know exactly what you are doing. How can we feel any sympathy for this girl who has manipulated and used these holy than thou footballers and managers for her own publicity seeking ends. She is a master manipulator who lead poor naive Ricky Nixon and these footballers to their doom. If only Ricky had had some exposure to the media previously none of this would have happened.*** ***caution - this post may contain nuts and sarcasm To repeat what RPFC has said "ugh"

Because thats what all mature, professional clubs - deliver ultimatums to players they want to keep, when what their management has asked for is not unreasonable.

Wow....I'm tipping you are under 30 and dont have children.